Delhi High Court

71,673 judgments

Year:

Abhinav Beri v. Union of India and Anr

11 Jul 2016 · The Chief Justice; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2016:DHC:4844-DB

The Delhi High Court disposed of a PIL on 'paid news' as a corrupt practice under Section 123 of the Representation of People Act, 1951, directing administrative authorities to consider the Law Commission's recommendations and take action within six months.

constitutional other Procedural paid news corrupt practice Section 123 Representation of People Act, 1951 Law Commission 255th Report

Yuvraj Gupta v. Union of India

11 Jul 2016 · G. S. Sistani; I. S. Mehta · 2016:DHC:4840-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a government servant against whom only a 'government's displeasure' is recorded without penalty must be considered for promotion by opening the sealed cover withheld during the departmental inquiry.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant departmental inquiry government's displeasure promotion sealed cover

The State (GNCT of Delhi) v. Umesh Rai

11 Jul 2016 · A.K. Pathak · 2016:DHC:4842

The Delhi High Court dismissed the State's petition for leave to appeal against the acquittal of a respondent charged with rash and negligent driving causing death, holding that the trial court's acquittal was a possible and not perverse view given the inconsistencies in prosecution evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant acquittal rash and negligent driving Section 279 IPC Section 304-A IPC

Sumer Singh v. UOI & Ors.

08 Jul 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Pratibha Rani · 2016:DHC:3635-DB

The Delhi High Court held that when an ex-parte removal order is set aside, the intervening period must be counted as service except for back wages, and quashed the order treating it as Dies Non.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Dies Non disciplinary proceedings reinstatement ex-parte inquiry

State NCT of Delhi v. Monu Kumar

08 Jul 2016 · 2016:DHC:9225

The Delhi High Court upheld the discharge of accused persons from dacoity and robbery with deadly weapon charges due to insufficient evidence of their active participation and use of a deadly weapon.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant dacoity robbery Section 395 IPC Section 397 IPC

Dinesh Bhardwaj & Ors v. The State of Delhi & Ors

08 Jul 2016 · P.S. Tejwani · 2016:DHC:9034
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition to quash an FIR under Sections 365, 307, and 34 IPC, holding that serious offences against society cannot be quashed merely on the basis of a settlement between the parties.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 307 IPC quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC non-compoundable offences

N.K. Tyagi v. R.D. Tyagi

08 Jul 2016 · Vibhu Bakhru · 2016:DHC:8587

The Delhi High Court disposed of execution petitions after the Judgment Debtor's counsel stated that the decree had been satisfied by encashment of cheques.

civil other decree satisfaction execution petition decree holder judgment debtor

HSIL Ltd v. Oracle Ceramic & Ors.

08 Jul 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Pratiha Rani · 2016:DHC:8576-DB

Delhi High Court held it has territorial jurisdiction over trademark infringement suits despite alleged offending activity occurring elsewhere, setting aside the order returning plaints and continuing interim injunctions.

civil appeal_allowed Significant territorial jurisdiction Trade Marks Act 1999 Section 134 interim injunction

Amarjeet v. South Delhi Municipal Corporation & Ors.

08 Jul 2016 · The Chief Justice; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal; G. Rohini · 2016:DHC:4806-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed a PIL seeking demolition of unauthorised constructions after finding that municipal authorities had taken appropriate statutory action under the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act.

administrative petition_dismissed unauthorised construction Delhi Municipal Corporation Act demolition orders public interest litigation

BHARTI INFRATEL LIMITED v. SISTEMA SHYAM TELE SERVICES LIMITED

08 Jul 2016 · Manmohan Singh · 2016:DHC:4802

The Delhi High Court held that termination of telecom infrastructure sharing contracts due to the 2G license cancellation constitutes change of law excusing exit charges and declined interim relief to secure disputed amounts during arbitration.

commercial_arbitration appeal_dismissed Significant exit charges change of law 2G judgment frustration of contract

Bharti Infratel Limited v. Sistema Shyam Tele Services Limited

08 Jul 2016 · Manmohan Singh · 2016:DHC:4804

The Delhi High Court held that termination of telecom infrastructure agreements due to the 2G license cancellation amounted to frustration exempting exit charges, declined interim security for disputed claims, and allowed transfer of business under a court-approved scheme.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Master Services Agreement exit charges 2G Judgment change of law

State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) v. Mohd Raja @ Shahnawaz

08 Jul 2016 · P. S. Teji · 2016:DHC:4803

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's discharge of the accused in a murder and robbery case due to insufficient corroborative evidence, inadmissible disclosure statements, and absence of judicial TIP.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant discharge order framing of charge circumstantial evidence judicial Test Identification Parade

Chanderbhan Garg & Anr v. KS Mehra Commissioner MCD

08 Jul 2016 · Manmohan J · 2016:DHC:4800

The Delhi High Court held that failure to acquire land within the statutory period under Section 55 of the Delhi Development Act results in automatic modification of the master plan, obliging the MCD to amend the layout plan accordingly and comply with court directions.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Delhi Development Act, 1957 Section 55 layout plan amendment compulsory acquisition

Manmohan Singh v. Government of NCT of Delhi

08 Jul 2016 · Manmohan · 2016:DHC:4801

The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioner to develop and maintain disputed land as a park pending final ownership adjudication, restraining others from interference.

civil appeal_allowed possession interim relief demarcation park development

HYUNDAI ROTEM COMPANY v. DELHI METRO RAIL CORPORATION

08 Jul 2016 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2016:DHC:4799

The Delhi High Court upheld a five-year blacklisting of Hyundai Rotem for concealing a prior debarment order, holding that a company is responsible for its employees' knowledge and non-disclosure of material facts constitutes fraudulent practice under contract terms.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant fraudulent practice blacklisting debarment procurement process

Deepak Dhankhar v. Vice Chancellor, Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University

08 Jul 2016 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2016:DHC:4798

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging the Sanskrit question paper pattern and upheld the university's decision to debar the student from the second professional examination for failing to clear all first professional subjects and not raising timely grievance.

administrative appeal_dismissed Indian Medicine Central Council Regulations BAMS examination examination grievance question paper pattern

Sumer Singh v. UOI & Ors.

08 Jul 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Pratibha Rani · 2016:DHC:4805-DB

The Delhi High Court held that when ex-parte disciplinary removal is set aside, the intervening period must be counted as service (excluding salary arrears) rather than treated as Dies Non.

administrative petition_allowed Significant ex-parte disciplinary proceedings removal from service reinstatement Dies Non

ANAND RAGHAVAN v. STATE OF DELHI

08 Jul 2016 · G.S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2016:DHC:4790-DB

Delhi High Court ordered the return of a minor child unlawfully retained in India to the UK jurisdiction, upholding the UK court’s custody order and emphasizing the principle of comity and the child’s welfare.

family petition_allowed Significant habeas corpus child custody habitual residence comity of courts

Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha v. Deepak Mangal & Ors.

08 Jul 2016 · Manmohan Singh · 2016:DHC:4791

The Delhi High Court held that the plaintiff's well-known trademarks TOYOTA, INNOVA, TOYOTA Device and PRIUS were infringed and passed off by the defendants' unauthorized use, rejecting bona fide use and delay defenses, and granted relief accordingly.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant Trademark infringement Passing off Well-known trademark Bona fide use

INDUS TOWERS LIMITED v. SISTEMA SHYAM TELESERVICES LTD

08 Jul 2016 · Manmohan Singh · 2016:DHC:4792

The Delhi High Court held that termination of telecom infrastructure services due to Supreme Court license cancellation amounted to frustration excusing exit charges, and refused interim relief under Section 9 post constitution of the Arbitral Tribunal, directing disputes to arbitration.

commercial_arbitration petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 9 petition Exit charges Frustration of contract